X-Message-Number: 22163
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:51:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: 
Subject: Ted Williams campaign

I hate to disturb the peaceful inanity of cryonet by
mentioning cryonics, but Randy's useful pointer to the
"save Ted Williams" site is worth following up.

In particular, some of the statements on the site are so
inaccurate and misleading, they could be considered
defamatory to a cryonics organization. I would think there is
ample material here for a counter-suit.

In addition it is interesting to note the air of desperation
and futility about the site itself. "Save Ted Williams"
suffers from the inconvenient fact that it is too late to
save Ted Williams, because he has been declared legally dead,
and no one disputes that he died from natural causes.

The Dora Kent case caused an uproar because a local coroner
created an (incorrect) suspicion that she died from unnatural
causes. So long as a cryonics organization follows orthodox
ethical procedures and does not interfere in any way with a
patient prior to death, it is difficult to whip up much of a
public outcry regarding the disposition of the deceased.

This situation is very different from that of abortion
clinics. Some cryonicists have been concerned that cryonics
facilities might attract the attention of activists,
comparable to anti-abortion fanatics. But clearly the
situations are not comparable. Abortion clinics terminate
fetuses. If they stopped doing that and merely helped women
who had "natural" miscarriages, this would be comparable with
cryonics organizations.

--Charles Platt

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22163